“The College Board plans to assign an adversity score to every student who takes the SAT to try to capture their social and economic background, jumping into the debate raging over race and class in college admissions.
This new number, called an adversity score by college admissions officers, is calculated using 15 factors including the crime rate and poverty levels from the student’s high school and neighborhood. Students won’t be told the scores, but colleges will see the numbers when reviewing their applications. …”
“The College Board, the company that administers the SAT exam taken by about two million students a year, will for the first time assess students not just on their math and verbal skills, but also on their educational and socioeconomic backgrounds, entering a fraught battle over the fairness of high-stakes testing.
The company announced on Thursday that it will include a new rating, which is widely being referred to as an “adversity score,” of between 1 and 100 on students’ test results. An average score is 50, and higher numbers mean more disadvantage. The score will be calculated using 15 factors, including the relative quality of the student’s high school and the crime rate and poverty level of the student’s neighborhood.
The rating will not affect students’ test scores, and will be reported only to college admissions officials as part of a larger package of data on each test taker. …”
64 years after the Brown v. Board of Education decision, why is this necessary? Why does the SAT have to be augmented with an “adversity score”? Why hasn’t meritocracy and spending trillions of dollars on integrated public schools worked and closed the racial gaps?
Suppose we were honest about the heritability of racial IQ differences. What would happen then? It would discredit the liberal establishment and vindicate the race realists and skeptics like Jared Taylor. The nerds who spend all their time reading studies and books and talking about racial differences in IQ would move on with their lives and discuss some other subject. After admitting the mistake, we could start educating children according to their needs and abilities rather than lying to them about how either they are oppressed by the evil White man or how their circumstances are their own fault.
If we started talking about cognitive stratification in the context of automation in a free-market capitalist economy, well, that would actually give credibility to “social justice.” After all, it is hard to blame someone for being poor when inequality is natural because they are born with an IQ of 75 or 85. There are fewer and fewer jobs to go around for people on the left side of the Bell Curve.
Note: Imagine what it is going to be like around 2035 in the age of designer babies. How high of an IQ will you need to find employment in our future economy?